Literature DB >> 17928614

Methodological infrastructure in surgical ergonomics: a review of tasks, models, and measurement systems.

Gyusung Lee1, Tommy Lee, David Dexter, Rosemary Klein, Adrian Park.   

Abstract

Though in its infancy, the discipline of surgical ergonomics is increasingly valued. Still, little has been written regarding this field's tasks, models, and measurement systems. These 3 critical experimental components are crucial in objectively and accurately assessing joint and postural control as exhibited by expert laparoscopic surgeons. Such assessments will establish characteristic patterns important for surgical training. In addition, risk factors associated with both minimally invasive surgical instruments and the operating room environment can be identified and minimized. Our review focuses on evidence-based experimental ergonomic studies undertaken in the field of laparoscopic surgery. Publications were located through PubMed and other database and library searches. This article describes tasks, models, and measurement systems and considers their specific applications and the types of data obtainable with the use of each. Advantages and limitations, especially those of measurement systems, are compared and discussed. Future trends and directions believed necessary for optimal investigation and results are also addressed.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17928614     DOI: 10.1177/1553350607307956

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Innov        ISSN: 1553-3506            Impact factor:   2.058


  13 in total

1.  A new wide-angle arthroscopic system: a comparative study with a conventional 30° arthroscopic system.

Authors:  Kyunghwa Jung; Dong-Ju Kang; Aashay L Kekatpure; Arnold Adikrishna; Jaesung Hong; In-Ho Jeon
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Higher physical workload risks with NOTES versus laparoscopy: a quantitative ergonomic assessment.

Authors:  Gyusung Lee; Erica Sutton; Tameka Clanton; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Ergonomic risk associated with assisting in minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Gyusung Lee; Tommy Lee; David Dexter; Carlos Godinez; Nora Meenaghan; Robert Catania; Adrian Park
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Evaluation of the effect of a laparoscopic robotized needle holder on ergonomics and skills.

Authors:  Thierry Bensignor; Guillaume Morel; David Reversat; David Fuks; Brice Gayet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Analysis of the posture pattern during robotic simulator tasks using an optical motion capture system.

Authors:  Kenta Takayasu; Kenji Yoshida; Takao Mishima; Masato Watanabe; Tadashi Matsuda; Hidefumi Kinoshita
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Which causes more ergonomic stress: Laparoscopic or open surgery?

Authors:  Robert Wang; Zhe Liang; Ahmed M Zihni; Shuddhadeb Ray; Michael M Awad
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Effect of Patient Body Mass Index on Laparoscopic Surgical Ergonomics.

Authors:  Zhe Liang; William D Gerull; Robert Wang; Ahmed Zihni; Shuddhadeb Ray; Michael Awad
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  FLS tasks can be used as an ergonomic discriminator between laparoscopic and robotic surgery.

Authors:  Ahmed M Zihni; Ikechukwu Ohu; Jaime A Cavallo; Jenny Ousley; Sohyung Cho; Michael M Awad
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Ergonomic analysis of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic procedures.

Authors:  Ahmed M Zihni; Ikechukwu Ohu; Jaime A Cavallo; Sohyung Cho; Michael M Awad
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 10.  Objective Assessment of Surgical Technical Skill and Competency in the Operating Room.

Authors:  S Swaroop Vedula; Masaru Ishii; Gregory D Hager
Journal:  Annu Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 9.590

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.